this post was submitted on 13 Mar 2025
288 points (98.3% liked)
Buy European
3446 readers
1911 users here now
Overview:
The community to discuss buying European goods and services.
Rules:
-
Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. No direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments.
-
Do not use this community to promote Nationalism/Euronationalism. This community is for discussing European products/services and news related to that. For other topics the following might be of interest:
Feddit.uk's instance rules apply:
- No racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia or xenophobia
- No incitement of violence or promotion of violent ideologies
- No harassment, dogpiling or doxxing of other users
- Do not share intentionally false or misleading information
- Do not spam or abuse network features.
- Alt accounts are permitted, but all accounts must list each other in their bios.
Benefits of Buying Local:
local investment, job creation, innovation, increased competition, more redundancy.
Related Communities:
Buy Local:
Buying and Selling:
!flohmarkt@lemmy.ca
Boycott:
!boycottus@lemmy.ca
Stop Publisher Kill Switch in Games Practice:
!stopkillinggames@lemm.ee
Banner credits: BYTEAlliance
founded 1 month ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It’s a pretty outdated view that US wine (primarily from California, Oregon, Washington) is of lesser quality of that of Europe. True, the big flagship wines -the first growth Bordeaux and premier cru Burgundy and Champagne, are rarely matched. But a large majority of American wine is on par with most European wine.
Now, of course I do not support tariffs on US imports of wine. But pushing back on the quality comment.
In my experience you get a pretty aweful wine in the US if you don't spend at least $10-15. In France and Italy, you get decent wines for 4-5€ and excellent wines for 10-15€. Nobody buys more expensive wines except maybe real connoisseurs.
Turns out the sun and vine do most of the work huh
But no matter how good it is, it will never be called champagne
It's only not allowed because the USA enforces that policy. Trump can decide tomorrow that USA sparkling wine can be called Champagne when sold in the USA and there's nothing France can do about it.
The orange clown has shown us the rules are only any good if there's someone who can enforce them. Most of them are just gentlemen's agreements.
There was a Central American country that demonstrated damages by the US, and was authorised by the International Courts to ignore US IP up to the value of damages claimed?
I think it was Belize and illegal blocks on gambling websites (because folks were still able to use US based gambling websites).
My point is that if the US ignores internationally recognised rules, such as regional naming, and causes demonstrated damage then it doesn't have to be repaid in like.
@veroxii @neo2478 right, and in terms of PDO there's not much Europe could retaliate with. What is there? Bourbon and Tennessee Whiskey? I think those are the only geographical indicators they have. But Cory Doctorow came up with some good ideas. The EU has already brought in alternative app stores but I'm sure there are some other tech & IP considerations https://www.pluralistic.net/2025/01/15/beauty-eh/
Yup. A lot of US income comes from predatory IP laws.
@person1 imagine if we applied normal copyright to Disney
yeah. it is called disney law in usa for a reason
...or was it mickey mouse law
@person1 I work in publishing for schools and it is *so* difficult/expensive to publish support for literature or media. Fair use & fair dealing laws can only get you so far. Great Gatsby finally coming out of copyright was a big moment. But the reason it's come out is of course because it's not actually recent literature any more.
what do you mean by "publish support"?
Coca Cola?
That's made globally.
@HenriVolney well yeah, there are *brands* but I don't think there are any geographical designations to compete with eg champagne, other than bourbon.
I’ll grant you that good champagne is better than great domestic sparkling.
But “no matter how good it is?” I don’t care what something is called; there is good domestic sparkling, and there is bad champagne. I’d rather drink the “good “” without the label.
Interesting aside. Because the senate never recognized the article in The Treaty of Versailles that prohibited use of Champagne, there are producers on the US grandfathered into being able to, technically, use the term.